beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.07.14 2017가합101711

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff:

(a) remove facilities in the building listed in the separate sheet and deliver the building; (b)

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 27, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to lease the instant building (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with D, setting the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, KRW 67,700 per month, KRW 67,700 per month, and the lease term of KRW 5 years.

B. In order to operate the wedding business in the instant building in collaboration with D (hereinafter “instant wedding business”), the Defendants installed various facilities (hereinafter “instant facilities”) in the instant building, obtained permission from the head of Songpa-gu (hereinafter “instant business permission”), and agreed to pay the Plaintiff the difference under the instant lease agreement jointly with D.

C. The instant lease agreement was terminated on March 31, 2016 due to the delayed payment of rent. Until that time, the overdue rent was KRW 10,150,821, and the Defendants occupied the instant building until that time.

[Basis] ① Defendant B: Confession (the main text of Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act), ② Defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment of this Court

A. According to the facts acknowledged in Paragraph 1), barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to remove the instant facilities and deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff seeking the exclusion of interference based on ownership, and to perform the procedure for reporting the closure of business regarding the instant permission, and jointly pay damages or unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount of damages calculated at the rate of KRW 10,150,821, and the amount of arrears from April 1, 2016 to April 31, 2016 and from April 1, 2016 to the date the delivery of the instant building is completed or the Plaintiff’s ownership is lost. (2) Defendant C has no obligation to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim, as it transfers its shares on the instant wedding project to Defendant B and withdraws from the partnership business relationship.